Virginia: Professors Don't Really Need Net

Share

Virginia: Professors Don't Really Need Net

Attempting to clarify a vaguely worded Internet decency law, the Virginia attorney general's office has filed a brief arguing that a 1996 statute prohibiting state employees from viewing "sexually explicit" communications does not place an unconstitutional limit on free-speech rights.

A response to a lawsuit by six state-university professors who charged that the state's Net decency law violated their First Amendment rights, the brief was filed Monday in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The state's main arguments add up to one thing: The law, which puts even erotic Victorian poetry out of bounds, places no undue burden on academic freedom.

The state's brief insists that the Internet is a useful but nonessential academic tool. The state argues that under the law, no penalties can be brought against those who "unknowingly" access sexually explicit material online. And even those who know they want prohibited matter can still get it - all they have to do is ask their superiors.

But plaintiffs' attorney Kent Willis, executive director of the Virginia American Civil Liberties Union, took issue with the state's basic premise. "The notion of what's essential changes over time," he said. "If the Internet isn't an essential research tool now, it's certainly right on the cusp."

As for the attorney general's insistence that people who unknowingly happen upon online smut aren't violating the state's prohibition, Willis noted that the law itself says nothing about intent.

Moreover, he said, "It's anathema to the notion of academic freedom to decree that a professor has to ask anyone before doing research," he said Tuesday.

The Virginia suit is one of three Net-decency challenges the ACLU has brought against state laws since early 1996, when the passage of the federal Communications Decency Act kicked off the current frenzy of Internet content regulation. Decisions are pending in cases in Georgia and New York. The federal law is currently under review by the US Supreme Court, with a decision expected any day.